From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 51/59] KVM: arm/arm64: GICv4: Add doorbell interrupt handling Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 09:19:15 +0100 Message-ID: <8b7c5a40-96b5-591f-a31f-b96fb03f507f@arm.com> References: <20170731172637.29355-1-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <20170731172637.29355-52-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <20170828181855.GM24649@cbox> <6d825d0f-eb99-8c9f-77f7-ab313e17a2cd@arm.com> <20170830205828.GN24522@cbox> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jason Cooper , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Thomas Gleixner , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu To: Christoffer Dall Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170830205828.GN24522@cbox> Content-Language: en-GB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 30/08/17 21:58, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 04:36:06PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> On 28/08/17 19:18, Christoffer Dall wrote: >>> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 06:26:29PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>>> When a vPE is not running, a VLPI being made pending results in a >>>> doorbell interrupt being delivered. Let's handle this interrupt >>>> and update the pending_last flag that indicates that VLPIs are >>>> pending. The corresponding vcpu is also kicked into action. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier >>>> --- >>>> virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c >>>> index 534d3051a078..6af3cde6d7d4 100644 >>>> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c >>>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c >>>> @@ -21,6 +21,19 @@ >>>> >>>> #include "vgic.h" >>>> >>>> +static irqreturn_t vgic_v4_doorbell_handler(int irq, void *info) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = info; >>>> + >>>> + if (!kvm_vgic_vcpu_pending_irq(vcpu)) { >>>> + vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v3.its_vpe.pending_last = true; >>>> + kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_IRQ_PENDING, vcpu); >>>> + kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu); >>>> + } >>> >>> Can this ever fire while vgic_v4_init() is running and before te rest of >>> the system has been properly initialized with some entertaining results >>> to follow? (I'm not sure if spurious doorbell non-resident vPE >>> interrupts is a thing or not). >> >> It could if you only had this patch. The following patch makes sure that >> the interrupt does not get enabled at request time, meaning it will only >> get enabled when the vcpu will eventually block. >> >> And yes, spurious doorbells are a real thing. And they suck. >> > > Ah, my abilities to forward read on a patch series are quite poor. Not quite. It indicates that the patch split is a bit wrong, and that irq_set_status_flags(irq, IRQ_NOAUTOEN | IRQ_DISABLE_UNLAZY); should really be in this patch and not the following one. I'll fix that as I rebase the whole thing. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...